Journal of Conventional Weapons Destruction

Volume 23 Issue 2 The Journal of Conventional Weapons Article 6 Destruction Issue 23.2

July 2019

The Impact of Landmines and Explosive Remnants of War on Food Security: The Lebanese Case

Henrique Garbino Swiss Foundation for Mine Action

Follow this and additional works at: https://commons.lib.jmu.edu/cisr-journal

Part of the Other Public Affairs, Public Policy and Public Administration Commons, and the Peace and Conflict Studies Commons

Recommended Citation Garbino, Henrique (2019) "The Impact of Landmines and Explosive Remnants of War on Food Security: The Lebanese Case," Journal of Conventional Weapons Destruction: Vol. 23 : Iss. 2 , Article 6. Available at: https://commons.lib.jmu.edu/cisr-journal/vol23/iss2/6

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Center for International Stabilization and Recovery at JMU Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Conventional Weapons Destruction by an authorized editor of JMU Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Garbino: The Impact of Landmines and Explosive Remnants of War on Food Security: The Lebanese Case

The Impact of Landmines and Explosive Remnants of War on Food Security: THE LEBANESE CASE by Henrique Garbino [ Swiss Foundation for Mine Action ]

he year 2017 was the third in a row of an exception- damage caused by warfare and its effects on land manage- ally high number of mine victims. According to the ment and migration.3,4 Drawing on this specific literature and T Landmine and Cluster Munition Monitor, in 2017 alone, other papers on landmines, cluster munitions, ERW, and im- 7,239 people became casualties of landmines or explosive rem- provised explosive devices (IEDs), as well as mine action re- nants of war (ERW), of which at least 2,793 were killed.1,2 Apart ports, it can be assessed that landmines impact food security from their direct physical effects, landmines and ERW also re- via six different and somewhat reinforcing mechanisms: ac- strict access to basic resources such as food and water, limit the cess denial (to arable land, water sources, and infrastructure), use of key infrastructure, and both force and restrict migra- loss of livestock, land degradation, reduced workforce, finan- tion.2 This article focuses on the impact of landmines and ERW cial constraints, and aid dependency. on food security, with an emphasis in food production. Food security is impacted by landmines via the lack of ac- Even though the relationship between landmines and food cess to arable land. Minefields are basically laid either to pro- production may seem obvious, theoretically, there are many vide protection to military bases and strategic resources or different possible mechanisms linking them, depending on as obstacles to the enemy’s freedom of movement.5 For the the affected country or region. Thus, the aim of this article is latter, it is likely that minefields will cover a large extent of twofold. First, it provides an overview of the possible theoreti- otherwise unprotected areas, such as open fields and plains. cal mechanisms connecting landmines and ERW to decreased Alternatively, militaries and nonstate armed groups fre- food security. Second, the theory is applied and assessed in the quently lay nuisance minefields, aimed at delaying and dis- case of Lebanon. organizing the enemy.5,6 Therefore, large areas of arable and The case study is presented based on specific literature on pasture lands are contaminated by landmines, for example, the Lebanese case, and on reports from the Lebanon Mine in Lebanon, Angola, Mozambique, Cambodia, Sinai, Kuwait, Action Centre (LMAC), the Landmine and Cluster Munition and Iraq.7 Access denial is further extended due to the sus- Monitor, the United Nations, and other international orga- pected presence of landmines or ERW. nizations. Whereas landmines and ERW still present a grave Landmines are also laid near water sources to reinforce threat to civilians and pose a significant impediment for the natural obstacles, such as beaches, rivers, lakes, and irri- development of affected communities, this article finds that gation ditches.8 Likewise, dams and hydroelectric power landmines and ERW alone insufficiently explain food insecu- plants, often perceived as strategic targets, may be protected rity in Lebanon. by minefields.5 The consequent lack of access to water sourc- es further compromises food security, especially livestock, Nexus Between Landmines and animal production, and herder communities. In addition, Food Security minefields aim to restrict access to infrastructure. Key roads, Researchers, policy-makers, and practitioners have been in- highways, railways, ports, and airports, as well as stations, creasingly aware of the often-unremembered impacts of armed bridges, and crossings are likely to be mined during con- conflict. Previous research has focused on the environmental flicts. In this sense, landmines also limit the maintenance

Published by JMU Scholarly Commons, 2019 1 ISSUE 23.2 @ JULY 2019 21 Journal of Conventional Weapons Destruction, Vol. 23, Iss. 2 [2019], Art. 6

access denial lack of access to arable land lack of access to water sources lack of access to infrastructure over-cultivation

land degradation loss of biodiversity micro-relief disruption chemical contamination landmines and explosive financial constraints decreased food production and food insecurity remnants of war reduced workforce

loss of livestock

aid dependency

Figure 1. Summary of causal mechanisms (adapted from Berhe and GICHD).7,9 All graphics courtesy of the author.

and construction of new infrastructure,7,9 which indirectly use for agricultural purposes, by clearing the field and effec- impacts the food production chain. tivelly ploughing it. Livestock is directly affected by mines, especially large Likewise, micro-relief disruption is caused by the acci- mammals such as cattle, horses, camels, and even sheep.10–12 dental detonation of landmines and ERW, the use of fire as Moreover, when humanitarian demining programs are ab- a rudimentary demining technique,7 and standard demining sent, communities rely on rudimentary techniques to assess procedures. During standard manual mine clearance, demin- whether an area is safe or not. In many cases, this means let- ers are required to remove the first layers of soil not only for ting cattle graze in suspected hazardous areas.7,13 every landmine or ERW they find but for each metal fragment Landmines may cause land degradation in roughly four detected, including shrapnel and bullet casings. Moreover, if ways: through loss of biodiversity, micro-relief disruption the condition of the mines or ERW do not allow for their re- (disruption of the first layer of soil), chemical contamination, moval and further destruction in a specific area, those are ex- and over-cultivation.7,9 First, fauna and flora are affected by ploded in situ and increase soil damage.18 the physical and chemical effects of the detonation of land- Albeit minimally, land degradation may be caused by chem- mines and ERW. This is particularly relevant for conflicts ical contamination. Regardless of whether their explosive con- fought in forests14 or on routes of migratory animals. In ad- tents have detonated or not, landmines and ERW contaminate dition, when arable land is not accessible, communities turn the soil and water sources with toxic substances,19 including to forests as their last resort for fuel (i.e., wood), food, and heavy metals19 and depleted uranium,7 which come from either shelter. This effect is aggravated by the concentration of refu- the ammunition casings or their explosive contents.11 gees and internally displaced persons, who are considerably It is worth noting that there is little evidence of actual chem- limited by minefields and concentrate around safe areas. It ical contamination from conventional mines. There are a few must be emphasized, though, that in some mined and con- landmines which might use liquid explosives (e.g. PFM-1) that taminated areas biodiversity is actually very high due to the have toxic effects. However, given their small size, the resul- lack of human interference (e.g. the Korean peninsula’s de- tant contamination is most likely negligible. The majority of militarized zone).15 mines are constructed from TNT- and RDX-based explosives, Demining techniques may also contribute to loss of bio- which are largely organic compounds and result in little or no diversity and deforestation. While removing small bushes toxic effects. and plants is a standard process in both mechanical16 and Notably, the arable lands not contaminated by landmines manual mine clearance,17 some communities and demining usually suffer from over-cultivation. First, a smaller portion organizations set minefields on fire in order to clear the veg- of land is pressed to produce more to compensate for the con- etation and facilitate future work.7 taminated areas.7 Second, these areas are often occupied by Conversely, some authors argue that vegetation loss, micro- forcibly displaced persons, who perceive the settlement as relief disruption, or even burning in mine clearance opera- temporary and do not invest in sustainable land manage- tions may have a positive effect in biodiversity by creating ment.20 In the long term, these practices may lead to soil ex- different mixes of habitats across the landscape.18 Moreover, haustion and decreased food production. as it relates to food production, both manual and mechani- Landmines also contribute to a reduced rural workforce cal mine clearance techniques arguably facilitate future land by killing, maiming, or injuring thousands of civilians every

https://commons.lib.jmu.edu/cisr-journal/vol23/iss2/6 2 22 THE JOURNAL OF CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS DESTRUCTION Garbino: The Impact of Landmines and Explosive Remnants of War on Food Security: The Lebanese Case

100%

1.56 11.76 24.04 6.51 1.22 75% 0.97 5.64

0.5 50%

4.23 27.44 56.09 15.19 2.38

25% 0.94 3.46

0.05 0% Agricultural land Grazing land Forest Housing Community Industrial area Development Other, (retail, services, unproductive trade, tourism) land Total cleared Remaining

Figure 2. Estimation of contaminated land distribution in square kilometers (as of 2017).30

year. Mostly men and boys, who are usually the ones respon- the U.N.-demarcated border with Israel.24 Cluster munition sible for providing for the household, fall victim to landmines contamination is concentrated in southern Lebanon, south and ERW.10 of the Litani river.29 A recent study commissioned by the Finally, mine action entails considerable costs to the affect- United Nations Development Fund and LMAC further es- ed state, posing as a financial burden to investments in devel- timated the distribution of the contaminated area according opment. The already fragile economies of affected countries to their use (Figure 2).30 are further weighed down by the enormous costs of mine Even though most of the affected areas are comprised of clearance and victim assistance.7,9 Therefore, internation- agricultural and grazing lands, those areas were defined by al support is critical for sustaining mine action programs. the Lebanon Mine Action Authority as second priority, and However, when badly managed, food assistance may under- the clearance processes began only in 2009. The first-priority mine local production and cause aid dependency.22,23 areas include access roads, infrastructure, water, electricity, municipalities, schools, houses, and gardens; while the third Case Study: Lebanon priority consists of uncultivated land, natural reserves, and Lebanon is mostly contaminated with landmines and wildlife territories. ERW from its two most recent conflicts: the Lebanese Civil Socioeconomic development has been considerably affect- War (1975–1990) and the 2006 Israel-Hezbollah Conflict, as ed, especially by ERW contamination. Almost 40 percent of well as minor clashes with Israeli forces from the 1990s to land used for livelihood has been contaminated and, out of the 2000s.24,25 A survey conducted in 2003 estimated that a the total area contaminated with cluster munitions, 97 per- total surface of 279.4 sq km was suspected to be contami- cent is used for food production (78 percent for crop cultiva- nated with landmines from the civil war.25 The last contam- tion and 19 percent for livestock).29 Apart from major losses ination occurred during the Israeli bombings from July to in the 2006 harvest season, unexploded cluster munitions August 2006, when an additional 54.9 sq km were contam- rendered a large swath of southern Lebanon inaccessible to inated with approximately one-million cluster munitions the local population.31,32 LMAC estimated that the cost of lost that did not detonate.26,27 In northeast Lebanon, spillovers agricultural production in 2007 amounted to US$126.7 mil- from the current conflict in neighboring Syria has also led to lion. Due to the mine action program, this value dropped to new contamination of mostly IEDs, booby-traps, and unex- $25 million in 2011.24 Darwish et al., however, argue that esti- ploded ordnance (UXO).28 mates of economic losses in southern Lebanon usually fail to It is estimated that landmine and ERW contamination account for indirect costs, which could amount to four times in Lebanon after the 2006 invasion reached a peak of about the initial estimates.33,34 334 sq km, more than 3.2 percent of the country area.26 The Post-conflict reconstruction and rehabilitation, as well most affected areas by landmines are in Batroun, Chouf, as development of infrastructure, were considerably hin- Jbeil, and Jezzine, north of the Litani river, in the Bekaa dered by landmines and ERW in southern Lebanon.35,36 Valley, and across Mount Lebanon, as well as the Blue Line, Preliminary estimates of the damaged caused by the 2006

Published by JMU Scholarly Commons, 2019 3 ISSUE 23.2 @ JULY 2019 23 Journal of Conventional Weapons Destruction, Vol. 23, Iss. 2 [2019], Art. 6

2006 Israel-Hezbollah Conflict Lebanese Civil War (July–August 2006) 500,000 (1975–1990)

400,000

300,000

200,000

100,000

0

1961 1963 1965 1967 1969 1971 1973 1975 1977 1979 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015

Donkeys Cattle Goats Horses Mules Pigs Sheep

Figure 3. Number of livestock in Lebanon 1961–2016).

war accounted for more than 340 infrastructure locations practice, as provided for in the National Mine Action Standards and sections of road rendered inaccessible.37 Accordingly, (NMAS).42 In accordance with regular manual demining tech- infrastructure was prioritized by the national mine action niques, ground vegetation is removed during mine clearance strategy for land release and was completely cleared between operations. However, the NMAS do not specify the maximum 2006 and 2009.24,38 branch diameter to be cut and removed,40 leaving it to the dis- There is not much research on the impacts of landmines cretion of demining organizations. Moreover, the default dis- and ERW on land degradation in Lebanon. In terms of biodi- posal procedure for landmines and ERW is destruction in situ. versity, however, natural reserves and wildlife territories were This means that wherever found, landmines and ERW shall be defined as third priority and have only recently been target- destroyed, except if it proves to be impractical or poses consid- ed by mine action programs.30,37 In addition, landmines are erable risk to nearby structures.40 known to have impacted the management of cedar forests, in Literature is mostly absent in addressing soil and wa- particular the Tannourine Cedar Forest Nature Reserve.39 ter contamination due to landmines and ERW in Lebanon. Mine clearance also contributes to the loss of biodiver- Nonetheless, there is strong evidence of depleted uranium sity and micro-relief disruption in Lebanon. Mined areas are contamination from Israeli bombings in 2006.42 This con- burned prior to demining in order to remove vegetation and fa- tamination is likely to come from bunker busting bombs cilitate mine clearance operations. This practice has been em- and missiles, which are less likely to fail and become ERW. ployed since at least the 1990s40 and has become a standardized Moreover, other general studies on soil contamination in

Syrian Civil War 2006 Israel-Hezbollah Conflict (2011–present) (July–August 2006) 200

150

100

50

0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Total killed Total injured

Figure 4. Total landmine and ERW casualties (2000–2016).

https://commons.lib.jmu.edu/cisr-journal/vol23/iss2/6 4 24 THE JOURNAL OF CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS DESTRUCTION Garbino: The Impact of Landmines and Explosive Remnants of War on Food Security: The Lebanese Case

$9 .20% $8

$7 .15% $6 $5 .10% $4 $3 .05% $2 $1 $0 0% 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Total amount Share of government expenditure

Figure 5. National investment in mine action, in million US dollars and as share of total government expenditure.

Lebanon do not consider landmines and ERW but focus on education (MRE), since casualties tend to decrease in time. other sources of pollution.43 By design, most mine-related incidents do not cause death. Loss of livestock is not accounted for in national or inter- Likewise, the desired effect of cluster munitions is achieved national mine action reports,44,45 as it does not seem to pres- by their detonation in large quantities; individually, one mu- ent a grave problem in Lebanon. Accordingly, data from the nition is usually not sufficient to kill a person. Accordingly, Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO)46 suggests that Youssef and Jawad Fares have found that most casualties in livestock production is more conditioned to the conflict it- Lebanon suffered amputations and injuries in craniofacial re- self and area access than the physical effects of landmines gions, thorax, abdomen, and lower and upper extremities.62 and ERW (Figure 3). Those injuries led to loss of motor function, body disfigura- As of the end of 2016, at least 3,736 people were involved in tion, chronic pain, and post-traumatic stress disorder.60 accidents with landmines or ERW, of which 906 were killed The Government of Lebanon, as indicated in Figures 5, 6, and 2,830 injured.47 Even though the data available on casual- and 7, 44,63 has invested $7.88 million per year on average in ties is highly inconsistent, most sources indicate that victims mine action for the last ten years, or roughly 13 percent of to- are largely men and boys—accounting for roughly 90 percent tal government expenditure (Figure 5). In comparison to in- of all casualties—from rural communities.48 After the Israeli ternational mine action funding, even though more modest invasion in 2006, casualties were concentrated in southern on average, national investments are more stable (Figure 6). Lebanon; however, due to the influx of Syrian refugees since Moreover, the national share of mine action funding has con- 2011, victims are now concentrated in the northern and east- siderably increased since 2008 (Figure 7). ern regions.47 Accordingly, data made available in reports Even though Lebanon is a considerably well-structured from the Landmine and Cluster Munition Monitor and LMAC and functioning state, information on landmines and ERW 25,43,46,49-61 show a sharp increase in casualties after 2006 and is often inconsistent, missing key observations, and scattered a smaller increase after 2011 (Figure 4). The graph also sug- across various sources, perhaps due to the recent establish- gests the beneficial outcomes of mine clearance and mine risk ment of the national authority and coordination center.64

80% $30

$25 60% $20 40% $15

20% $10

$5 0% 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 $0 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 National International International National Figure 6. National and international investment in mine action, in million US dollars. Figure 7. Share of total investments in mine action.

Published by JMU Scholarly Commons, 2019 5 ISSUE 23.2 @ JULY 2019 25 Journal of Conventional Weapons Destruction, Vol. 23, Iss. 2 [2019], Art. 6

Discussion The financial burden born by the Government of Lebanon is As previously discussed, Lebanon has been significantly an impediment for investment in other areas, such as infra- affected by the scourge of landmines and ERW. Contaminated structure, agriculture, and water and land management. On areas have denied access to large swaths of arable land, espe- the other hand, the Lebanese mine action program is consis- cially in southern Lebanon, and, to a lesser extent, to water tently becoming less reliant on international support, thus de- sources and infrastructure. According to LMAC, all water creasing its risk of aid dependency. sources and infrastructure are deemed to be clear from mines Conclusion and ERW. Indirect losses in productivity due to lack of access Access denial, especially to arable land and pasture, and the to arable land and pasture may amount to about $30–$60 financial burden born by the government seem to be the most million, during an estimated ten-year period for clearing the pressing challenges to food production in Lebanon. Lack of affected areas.33 access is not only the main cause of insufficient agricultur- Victims of landmine and ERW accidents undoubtedly suf- al productivity, but it is also responsible for channeling the fer tremendous personal challenges. However, the total num- movement of Syrian refugees and restricting settlements. ber of casualties is likely too small to impact food production Even though there is not enough information on land degra- and food security outside the victim’s closest circles. It is dation in relation to landmine and ERW contamination, it is worth noting that the number of casualties has considerably best contained with effective water and soil management tech- dropped in recent years, probably due to the ongoing MRE niques and programs. The economic costs posed by the mine and mine clearance activities.44 That said, food security is per- action program, however, consist of a significant share of gov- haps more affected by the displacement of rural workers to- ernment expenditure and arguably presents an impediment to ward urban environments as a consequence of lack of access investments in other areas. to arable land and fear of the threat of landmines than by the However tragic, the reduction of rural workforce due to direct effect of landmines in killing or maiming civilians. mine- and ERW-related incidents does not seem to be suffi- The recent influx of Syrian refugees coupled with the -ex cient to impact large-scale food production and food security. isting mine and ERW threat pose yet another risk to food Mine victims and their families certainly face huge challenges security in Lebanon. Refugees are concentrated in most- to rehabilitation and personal development, but this impact is ly mine- and ERW-free areas in the Bekaa Valley,29 which is likely to be restricted. Likewise, the loss of livestock does not also the region with the most productive agriculture and live- appear to be a significant concern. stock in Lebanon. In 2015, an estimated 3.3 million people, Finally, there may be significant information gaps and mea- including Syrian and Palestinian refugees and host commu- surement errors in the data on mine action in Lebanon. On nities, were in need in the country; of which 1.35 million were top of that, the psychological impact and trauma caused by in need of food.65 Food aid is mainly provided by the World death and injury of loved ones, being unable to provide for Food Programme and its partners, mostly through e-cards, your family, the loss of livelihood activities, and the constant cash, and food vouchers.65 These measures help foster local fear of landmines, are harder to measure.34 However, they cer- economy and build local capacities, avoiding aid dependency. tainly have profound effects on the economic, social, and psy- However, as proposed by Berhe7 and in reference to Hardin’s chological well-being of local communities. tragedy of commons,21 it is likely that the concentration of See endnotes page 61 refugees in small areas will lead to over-cultivation and soil exhaustion in the long run unless accompanied by efficient water and land management. Despite considerable international financial support, the Henrique Siniciato Terra Garbino Government of Lebanon bears significant costs for its mine Swiss Foundation for Mine Action Uppsala University, Department of Peace and Conflict Research action program. In the last years, almost .15 percent of gov- Henrique Garbino served in the Brazilian ernment expenditure have been dedicated to mine and ERW Army from 2006 to 2017 as a combat engi- clearance, MRE, victim assistance, and other support and neer officer and an EOD specialist. He has recently finished the master’s program at administrative costs. Nearly all the investment goes to mine Uppsala University Department of Peace clearance, which is the most expensive component of mine ac- and Conflict Research and, as part of the Rotary Peace Fellowship, he was posted for tion. In 2016, for example, about 93 percent of total invest- three months to FSD programs in Tajikistan ments was dedicated to the clearance of landmines and ERW.44 and Ukraine.

https://commons.lib.jmu.edu/cisr-journal/vol23/iss2/6 6 26 THE JOURNAL OF CONVENTIONAL WEAPONS DESTRUCTION